As concerns rise over the threat of Section 301 duties being removed from Chinese imports, Dan Pickard, Chair of Buchanan’s International Trade & National Security Practice, explains why more and more manufacturers are turning to combined antidumping and countervailing actions for relief and protection.
Watch the video here or below:
Dan Pickard: We’re in a new environment where “Made in the USA” has heightened importance, and for US manufacturers who have traditionally had to battle against unfairly-priced imports. There’s really, kind of new meaningful tool in the toolbox, and that is – historically these US manufacturers who had to try to get some relief against unfair priced imports, turned to the US anti-dumping law, which is a law that provides relief for US manufacturers when they’ve been injured by unfairly-priced imports.
Unfairly priced, traditionally, was an examination of whether the imports were sold in the United States at a price below their home market; and then with the most recent surge in Chinese imports over the past twenty years, there was a special test created for China in regard to how unfair pricing was calculated. But now, more than ever, US companies are also turning to the US countervailing duty law. And what countervailing duty law allows is for US manufacturers to have a relief against unfair subsidization by their foreign competitors when they’re receiving subsidies from their home government.
More and more frequently now, US companies are bringing combined anti-dumping cases and countervailing duty cases so that they received adequate remedies and protections against imports that are sold at unfair prices and that are receiving unfair subsidies. In light of the current recognized importance of maintaining the US manufacturing base – any concerns about Section 301 duties coming off of Chinese imports – it’s reasonable to assume more and more companies are going to turn to both the US anti-dumping law and the US countervailing duty law.